Why to vote for Obama.

[JTFAN99]

Well you know how it is JT. We have been "over there" for eleven years now "defending freedom". Actually it has been much longer. It's interesting those at the top don't seem to suffer as much both economically or in terms of death and psychologically/physically debilitating issues as those p$$ss ants at the bottom. Indeed it is costing a lot of $ now and in the future displaying and continuing with the world dominance theme. Somehow I believe it is backfiring . How about you?

 

 

Well hares, you know the people that crashed the planes in the buildings are still alive in Afghanistan and Iraq. they didn't die that day. So we had to go over there and get them. Now don't be fooled. Even though most of them were from Saudi Arabia, Im 100% sure they are in Iraq and Afghanistan now. And although we killed their supreme leader who was so powerful, that he had to hide out for yrs and was found in a regular house in Pakistan, we should still fear these guys. Because they have huge rocks they can throw at us.

 

And because of this, we had to ignore the subprime mortgages, and take a budget surplus and turn it into a deficit. It all makes sense now.

[goldandwhite]

+1. I guess the only way we can picture Christ is if he's suffering.

There is another way to picture Him (Revelation 19:11-16)

 

11 Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war. 12 His eyes were like a flame of fire, and on His head were many crowns. He had a name written that no one knew except Himself. 13 He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God. 14 And the armies in heaven, clothed in fine linen, white and clean, followed Him on white horses. 15 Now out of His mouth goes a sharp[g] sword, that with it He should strike the nations. And He Himself will rule them with a rod of iron. He Himself treads the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. 16 And He has on His robe and on His thigh a name written:

 

KING OF KINGS AND

LORD OF LORDS."

 

I think Christ will lose his "Buddy Jesus" image at that point.

[camuchs]

+1. I guess the only way we can picture Christ is if he's suffering.

Also, I guess we do tend to worship the dead Jesus and forget that HE LIVES. Reckon when we'll start giving recognition to and start following the "LIVING" Jesus?

[goldandwhite]

What context would that be? I'm baffled. Is your mindset too closed and your heart too hard to see the message [correct me if I am wrong Screamin']?

Winking = eye = I

Heart = LOVE

Pointing at YOU

Thumbs up = That's GOOD

 

Yes, I couldn't agree more - the mindset of some makes one wonder why some go to church at all.

Christ was whipped, beaten, and tortured for our sins, willingly giving His life for us. He now sits at the right hand of the Father in resurrected power. If "Buddy Jesus" is your perception of Christ then so be it, but it's not mine. I asked ScreamingEagle an honest question, I appreciated his response, and you pile on. I didn't intend to offend anyone, and will apologize if I did so.

[DaveTV1]

you can't be serious.

 

I don't remember Clinton leaving Bush with 2 wars. A near depression, and a budget deficit.

 

Actually it was quite the opposite, and the country knows that. Clinton left office with the highest approval rating of any president since 1946. Higher than Ronald Reagan.

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-presapp0605-31.html

 

 

How time allows one to forget the economy that Clinton left Bush. Let's go back in time : http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/economy/2003-07-17-recession_x.htm . I can still remember newspaper headlines with people in suits begging for jobs across the country. This doesn't even include the sub-prime lending fiasco started by Clinton and Frank. That is what caused most of the banks to fail in 2008. Who cares about the car makers. I suppose you don't remember all the bankruptcies that happened from 1999-2002. I've brought those up several times on Smoaky. I have friends that worked for EDS, Marconi, Sprint, Tycho, WorldCom, just to name a few that lost their jobs because of the economy. I know many people that lost a lot of money with the 2000 Stock Market Crash. As I said W. didn't really help, but he didn't put the hurt on many Americans the way that Obama and his Administration of clowns has done.

[DaveTV1]

Nope, it was about the life of Nathaniel Bedford Forrest. No other Southerners were included. Not sure about the colors. Probably just white and peach though.

 

I have to admit, I belong to the Cucamongo Klan :

. I don't understand the current ties today.

[JTFAN99]

How time allows one to forget the economy that Clinton left Bush. Let's go back in time : http://usatoday30.us...recession_x.htm . I can still remember newspaper headlines with people in suits begging for jobs across the country. This doesn't even include the sub-prime lending fiasco started by Clinton and Frank. That is what caused most of the banks to fail in 2008. Who cares about the car makers. I suppose you don't remember all the bankruptcies that happened from 1999-2002. I've brought those up several times on Smoaky. I have friends that worked for EDS, Marconi, Sprint, Tycho, WorldCom, just to name a few that lost their jobs because of the economy. I know many people that lost a lot of money with the 2000 Stock Market Crash. As I said W. didn't really help, but he didn't put the hurt on many Americans the way that Obama and his Administration of clowns has done.

 

First off it was not near the recession Obama inherited.

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2011/06/02/a-presidential-comparison-of-job-loss-gains/

 

Job loss and gain under President Bush, Jan. 2001-Dec. 2008.

Job loss and gain under President Obama, Jan. 2009-April 2011.

 

 

There was nearly 600k jobs lost the month Obama took office in Jan.2009. Which was the highest in 34 yrs. He took office Jan.20,2009.

http://money.cnn.com...y/jobs_january/

 

Then another 651k in Feb.2009.

http://www.google.co...fB1JiH5NRthlRTQ

 

Then 663,000 in Mar. 2009

http://money.cnn.com...march/index.htm

 

So its no comparison. So you can stop with that argument.

 

And second. WHAT ABOUT THE 2 WARS AND BUDGET DEFICIT? You still fail to address that. Bush didn't come in office with that on the plate.

 

You can't argue for one minute that Bush step into office under near the same conditions as Obama. This is just a fact.

[KirtFalcon]

How time allows one to forget the economy that Clinton left Bush. Let's go back in time : http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/economy/2003-07-17-recession_x.htm . I can still remember newspaper headlines with people in suits begging for jobs across the country. This doesn't even include the sub-prime lending fiasco started by Clinton and Frank. That is what caused most of the banks to fail in 2008. Who cares about the car makers. I suppose you don't remember all the bankruptcies that happened from 1999-2002. I've brought those up several times on Smoaky. I have friends that worked for EDS, Marconi, Sprint, Tycho, WorldCom, just to name a few that lost their jobs because of the economy. I know many people that lost a lot of money with the 2000 Stock Market Crash. As I said W. didn't really help, but he didn't put the hurt on many Americans the way that Obama and his Administration of clowns has done.

 

 

Clinton also left the military in dire straits leaving cruise missle stockpiles critically low and huge backlogs of maintenance realated activities sorely unfunded. Clinton decided to let his predecessor pay for all the missles fired during his 2 terms. I remember tracking grounded aircraft rates being astronomically high due to maintenance backlogs because of lack of funds for spare parts that Clinton drastically cut back during his time in office. Clinton, Frank, Schumer and Dodd are far more responsible for the economic collaps at the end of GWBs 2nd term than GWB. The so called Clinton surplus was all smoke and mirrors based on the doc.com bubble that burst ... that's the assessment of many leading economists, but the libs will cite the "myth" of the Clinton surplus ad nauseum. That's what they do, create false narrative after false narrative believing the more they cite it will miraculously become the truth. Any time Clinton's name comes up historically, the first thing that should come to mind is one word .... IMPEACHED.

[parentofredheads]

First off it was not near the recession Obama inherited.

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2011/06/02/a-presidential-comparison-of-job-loss-gains/

 

Job loss and gain under President Bush, Jan. 2001-Dec. 2008.

Job loss and gain under President Obama, Jan. 2009-April 2011.

 

 

There was nearly 600k jobs lost the month Obama took office in Jan.2009. Which was the highest in 34 yrs. He took office Jan.20,2009.

http://money.cnn.com...y/jobs_january/

 

Then another 651k in Feb.2009.

http://www.google.co...fB1JiH5NRthlRTQ

 

Then 663,000 in Mar. 2009

http://money.cnn.com...march/index.htm

 

So its no comparison. So you can stop with that argument.

 

And second. WHAT ABOUT THE 2 WARS AND BUDGET DEFICIT? You still fail to address that. Bush didn't come in office with that on the plate.

 

You can't argue for one minute that Bush step into office under near the same conditions as Obama. This is just a fact.

Yep, I think there is a comparison. Looks like with Bush, from the middle of '03 to January of '08, we were above the line. That's roughly 4 1/2 years with wars going on. Not to mention, wasn't his rules that the House, Barney Frank and others were pushing new rules on housing...it finally came to a head.

 

Now, on Obama, he can't seem to get it going till what like May or June of 2010, then it takes a nose dive the next month apparently...so what happened till the last quarter of 2012? And the wars, please... Afghanistan is Obama's baby now.

[JTFAN99]

Yep, I think there is a comparison. Looks like with Bush, from the middle of '03 to January of '08, we were above the line. That's roughly 4 1/2 years with wars going on. Not to mention, wasn't his rules that the House, Barney Frank and others were pushing new rules on housing...it finally came to a head.

 

Now, on Obama, he can't seem to get it going till what like May or June of 2010, then it takes a nose dive the next month apparently...so what happened till the last quarter of 2012? And the wars, please... Afghanistan is Obama's baby now.

 

 

It appears that you are having trouble reading the graph.

 

#1.Bush didn't have to start from job deficit Obama had to start from. He basically started from close to the line anyway.

 

#2. Look at Job growth under Obama. That is alot larger than GW Bush. again, look at where obama started from.

 

#3. Look at the chart again, its very clear that there has been a larger job growth under Obama. Just look at the job growth from 01/09 to 01/10. GW Bush didn't have one single yr of job growth like that his entire 8 yrs. And yes, the Dems were running the entire show then.

[parentofredheads]

It appears that you are having trouble reading the graph.

 

#1.Bush didn't have to start from job deficit Obama had to start from. He basically started from close to the line anyway.

 

#2. Look at Job growth under Obama. That is alot larger than GW Bush. again, look at where obama started from.

 

#3. Look at the chart again, its very clear that there has been a larger job growth under Obama. Just look at the job growth from 01/09 to 01/10. GW Bush didn't have one single yr of job growth like that his entire 8 yrs. And yes, the Dems were running the entire show then.

You're showing what 7 1/2 years versus 1 1/2 years... now seriously...not to mention it was the Liberals ideas that got us into the mess in 2008.

 

I could care less where each one started from. They were president. Their policies.

[JTFAN99]

You're showing what 7 1/2 years versus 1 1/2 years... now seriously...not to mention it was the Liberals ideas that got us into the mess in 2008.

 

I could care less where each one started from. They were president. Their policies.

 

 

Uh, I didn't show 7-1/2 yrs vs 1-1/2. The top Graph shows the entire Bush yrs

 

The bottom graph shows the Obama first 2 1/2 yrs. But As we both know the unemployment rate has continued to go down so more jobs have been created since then.

 

Also, its very relevant were they started from. If GW Bush is starting from -250k job loss and creates 500k jobs, He is looking at postive net change in jobs.

 

But Obama who started from -750k, if 500k jobs are created under his watch, he still has a negative net change in jobs.

 

so it matters where you start from.

 

also, you say "I could care less where each one started from. They were president. Their policies." So why are you blaming the liberals on the job losses in 2008. GW Bush was president. He signs in policies. So you are being a hypocrite.